Whats the point of a second MUX

liamtech

Ok... Im sure this is going to get shot down but im wondering what really is the point of a second MUX at the moment - As far as i am concerned there really are very few other channels left that could potentially come to Saorview AT PRESENT

So in all honesty why bother with it for now:

As far as i can see the only options for joining Saorview are:

Euronews-Possibility as it is free to the continent of europe -

Oireachtas TV - This is the only one i reckon they could fire up in a short time, all DAIL/Seanaid sittings are shown online live on RTE.ie - Therefore it is "Technically/Sort-Of" up and running:

TRTE - Possible but would more likely be a duplication of RTE2 material

Cúla4 - See above but with TG4 material

Setanta Ireland- I FIRMLY believe this should come to Saorview due to Setanta's receiving of licence payer funds - They should be on Saorview, or like Mrs Thatcher "I WANT MY MONEY BACK:pac:" - Hypothetically if it did come, it would most likely be a cut down version of what is currently on SKY and UPC - But hey il take that!

TV3-HD - Long term it is being planned, but i would say Q3/4 2012 in all likely hood:

Irish Film Channel - I cant see this happening due to lack of funds (Like the dublin Metro Line i suppose :mad:)

RTE3? - It kind of bounced around for a while as an idea, but i havent heard anything recently -

SO! i say again whats the point in a second MUX - More Radio stations? Possibly i suppose, but i would say they are hardly queuing up.

I would say the only real possibilities are euro news and Oireachtas TV for now. I would welcome them and any other additions that are on the cards -

One thing puzzles me, why is it necessary for RTE2-HD to move to MUX2 - If there is room on MUX1 it could presumably stay there -

Obviously if they are going to increase the bandwidth we would all appreciate it - while there at it they could do the same for RTE1, and TV3 - maybe up the Res a bit!

The Cush

liamtech wrote: »

Ok... Im sure this is going to get shot down but im wondering what really is the point of a second MUX at the moment

My take on it following the Ministerial Decision on the extra RTÉ channels was to create spare capacity for future FTA services.

The BAI sought Expressions of Interest for the spare capacity about that time. No further update since.

The Cush

The Cush wrote: »

My take on it following the Ministerial Decision on the extra RTÉ channels was to create spare capacity for future FTA services.

The BAI sought Expressions of Interest for the spare capacity about that time. No further update since.

But surely switching on the 2nd transmitter in the year(s) prior to that if it ever happens is a violent waste of licence payers money at a time when rte relatively speaking are as broke as the country?
Everything as it stands can run on 1 mux and in these days of pvr's,rte1+1 isn't a good enough reason.

STB

Mux 1 was only ever designed to hold 5 SD stations and a HD station, radio services and epg data from a PSI server.

We are beyond that stage.

More bandwidth equals hq output. Nevernmind that it allows more stations move to HD, not just one.

Trevord

I know nothing about the cost of transmitting TV signals.

Is the creation of capacity for a second mux expensive ?

What are the major costs in bringing tv signals to people homes?

Capital Costs: Masts
A big captial cost I imagine.
I have no doubt that masts are expensive (I watched that grainy B&W video that someone posted here a while back on the building of one of the RTE transmitters). Building an access road up a mountain can't be cheap, not to mention the cost of the mast itself, getting the parts up there and the cost of paying people to put it together.

But I'm guessing that you don't need extra masts for an extra MUX ?

Even if you don't need an extra mast do you need to add extra equipment at the existing mast for each MUX?

Running costs:
Does transmitting use a lot of electricity ?
How about personnel to manage the stuff ?

Sorry for all these questions but I have been wondering about this for a while.

Sam Russell

Well, at the moment RTE NN is just a waste as it does nothing new or well. RTE 1+1 is a waste of spectrum. RTEjr is a rebroadcast of RTE 2 and is a waste of spectrum (not that I watch it so it might be different). If RTE NN and RTE 1+1 were used to expand and rearrange the RTE 1 schedule then that would be an improvement. For example, if the week in Politics were to be broadcast on RTE NN at the time of its recording, that would be a plus. If some of RTE 1 programmes were broadcast earlier on the RTE 1 +1 channel, before they are shown on RTE 1. (Obviously, the name would be changed).

The current rules are the manifestation of a hidden agenda which obviously disadvantages RTE. Not sure who benefits but it certainly is not RTE nor is it the public.

liamtech

STB wrote: »

Mux 1 was only ever designed to hold 5 SD stations and a HD station, radio services and epg data from a PSI server.

We are beyond that stage.

More bandwidth equals hq output. Nevernmind that it allows more stations move to HD, not just one.

Well in that case bring it on - i want the RTE1, TV3, & TG4 Resolution's increased a bit - even if not HD it would be great to see them at 720X568

How long before this happens? If the past is anything to go on, it will be ages before this happens! Any timescale mentioned - And are there ANY rumors about other TV stations...

There should be capacity for the 4 channells in hd,3 of the radio channels and RTE NN
The rest is expensive unwatched/unlistened bloat.

bk

You might see C4 with Irish ads and UTV being interested.

And remember they both could be in HD.

I'd really like to see RTE Plus (high quality US imports shown at prime time).

We will probably get RTE 1 HD and TV3 HD before long.

Setanta is an obvious one, would allow them to bid for GAA content.

We are already into the territory of needing a second MUX if even one of the any of the above becomes a reality.

STB

Deleted User wrote: »

There should be capacity for the 4 channells in hd,3 of the radio channels and RTE NN
The rest is expensive unwatched/unlistened bloat.

Even forgetting about the fact that you will also have to fit in the radio channels, the PSI server, the SD channel, the MHEG5 service and the audio for 5.1/HE-AAC.

How would you fit 4 HD channels on to a DVB-T mux with a capacity of 24 ?? You must have some super stat muxing algorithm that the dvb community arent aware of.

By the way RTE are required to provide full HD versions of RTÉ One and RTÉ Two by mid 2013.

lawhec

The intention - surely - is for the current four terrestrial channels to be made available in High Definition by around 2013/14. In that case, using DVB-T you might be able to get four video streams maximum on a single multiplex at around 6Mbps per video stream which even with recent codec encoding improvements is pushing it a bit. Reducing it to three would give a bit more elbow room to around 8Mbps. Then you'd have to include audio, EIT data, MHEG & WST teletext which also cut into the total bit rate available.

So say RTÉ One, TV3 and TG4 were able to launch HD services within the next 18 months and no new channels become available from what there currently is - you'd need two multiplexes to handle everything that's there, 4 HD and 3 SD services. As an example, one multiplex could hold RTÉ One HD, RTÉ Two HD, RTÉ News Now (SD), RTÉjr/RTÉ One +1 (SD), Aertel MHEG & WST Text & RTÉ Radio. The other multiplex, TV3 HD, TG4 HD, 3e (SD), WST text services for the two HD channels assuming they are still be broadcasting it possibly with MHEG services as well. Without any of the SD channels upgrading to HD, there is perhaps room for 2-3 more channels on the former multiplex and 3-4 on the latter.

Euronews? Possible, I think its terrestrial coverage in Europe is very limited on a 24hr basis (not broadcasting part-time as is the case on RTÉ right now).

Oireachtas TV? Again possible, and with coverage currently available on rte.ie, like News Now it shouldn't take too much effort to patch it into the DTT network.

Pan-Contentinal & Pan-Global News channels (Excluding Euronews)? Certainly possible. Russia Today is already broadcasting 24/7 on Freeview, and Al Jazeera is on during the evening hours. Those two may be interested in getting on to Saorview, France 24, DW-TV and CNN might also as well. Sky News and BBC World might be outside interests.

National Commercial Radio? This would include Today FM, Newstalk, 4FM and Spirit, the latter two would help increase its national coverage outside of urban areas in particular especially with the non movement of commercial DAB right now. Some of the regional and local stations might also take the opportunity to expand its terrestrial coverage e.g. Nova.

UK based channels? Excluding the five main terrestrials, who would be interested? I wouldn't rule E4 out as it's already popular in the south, is on Freeview and Freesat and if it didn't cost Channel 4 the earth for a slot on Saorview, they might go for it. Don't rule out a shopping or dial-a-tart channel from also being interested.

In terms of the additional costs of transmitting a second multiplex, it seems RTÉNL already have at least a second DTT transmitter at each site at present, fed into transmitting aerial etc. so the only additional cost would be the additional electricity required to power the transmitter on site along with equipment for receiving the second multiplex from the feeding network (if it hasn't already been installed yet) and the encoder at the source of the network being fed to the transmitters (assuming this hasn't already been tried).

If there is any potential benefit to getting a move on with more HD and/or additional services, the take up of Saorview in homes which currently rely on analogue terrestrial for RTÉ/TV3/TG4 could become quicker with the potential of shutting down analogue services earlier than planned. That itself is a saver on electricity costs.

Sam Russell

I find it difficult to understand why an 18 month lead in time [two years if you start last October at the launch of Saorview] for a switch off of analogue. I would think that now everything is in place, they should go for switch off by the end of the year. Why the delay? We have the technology!

STB

Sam Russell wrote: »

I find it difficult to understand why an 18 month lead in time [two years if you start last October at the launch of Saorview] for a switch off of analogue. I would think that now everything is in place, they should go for switch off by the end of the year. Why the delay? We have the technology!

Public Service Information campaign.

lawhec

Sam Russell wrote: »

I find it difficult to understand why an 18 month lead in time [two years if you start last October at the launch of Saorview] for a switch off of analogue. I would think that now everything is in place, they should go for switch off by the end of the year. Why the delay? We have the technology!

I don't think they would be able to start it until Saorsat is fully up and running at least. You'd also need to take into account the lead time required for Saorview approved equipment to get into markets (especially approved PVRs) to help lower consumer costs.

Do it right, or you could end up confusing viewers who will then be driven into the arms of UPC & Sky thinking they have no other option.

higgz

Every one of those channels will be in HD at some stage. An Irish Film Channel shouldn't even bother launching in SD and RTÉ News Now would look great in HD with all the onscreen graphics. Plus 3e shows a whole bunch of imported US shows. Big potential there too.

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

I find it difficult to understand why an 18 month lead in time [two years if you start last October at the launch of Saorview] for a switch off of analogue. I would think that now everything is in place, they should go for switch off by the end of the year. Why the delay? We have the technology!

In fairness, in the UK, Freeview launched in 2002, but the first switch off started 5 years later in 2007 and won't complete until the end of 2012.

And that is a service with far cheaper boxes, with TV's on the market for years and with a much better value for money offering (35 channels on Freeview versus 5 on analogue).

18 months is incredibly aggressive. Some would argue too aggressive. We are really leaving all this to the last minute.

The Cush

Now that the DTT network has been rolled out (24 May 2011) and Saorview publicly launched (26 May 2011), the countdown to ASO begins.

1. Simulcast Phase to allow sufficient time for viewers to prepare for ASO, upgrade / replace equipment (18 months)
2. Announce ASO date (later this summer)
3. Public Information & Awareness Campaign incl. telephone call centre (start Oct 2011)
4. Assistance / Help scheme? (early 2012?)
5. ASO (Oct 2012)

Sam Russell

lawhec wrote: »

I don't think they would be able to start it until Saorsat is fully up and running at least. You'd also need to take into account the lead time required for Saorview approved equipment to get into markets (especially approved PVRs) to help lower consumer costs.

Do it right, or you could end up confusing viewers who will then be driven into the arms of UPC & Sky thinking they have no other option.

I accept the point about Saorsat, but the manufacturers did not start the certification process until after the launch last October, and did not stop selling dud TVs until ... what, they are still at it?

This current 'Tommy and PJ' nonsense is not telling anyone anything.

A simple message at every commercial break on analogue channels would be very effective.
'This channel will be closing on 31st October. Get a Saorview TV or STB to continue watching. Check out saorview.ie'

Also, we do not have to turn every transmitter at the same time. Start with ThreeRock as it has been on for three years, and is UHF only.

Can you imagine the screaming that will ensue on the 32nd of October if all the analogue transmitters go off air at the same time on the 31st of October?

justsomebloke

Sam Russell wrote: »

A simple message at every commercial break on analogue channels would be very effective.
'This channel will be closing on 31st October. Get a Saorview TV or STB to continue watching. Check out saorview.ie'

Seriously? forcing people to spend money in a recession isn't something any Politician is going to want to do unless they have to and in this case they won't.

The Cush

The "Tommy & PJ" adverts are to promote the availability Saorview (and not ASO) and is the responsibility of RTÉ.

The ASO public information campaign is the responsibility of the Dept of Communication. They currently have a tender out for a contractor to develop and run the campaign. Tommy and PJ may not be involved in that one.

It's not in the Government's best interest to force people to replace/upgrade all their analogue equipment in a short period of time.

An 18 month run in to ASO gives almost everyone sufficient time to upgrade which includes the Christmas / New Year sales period.

Mike 1972

bk wrote: »

In fairness, in the UK, Freeview launched in 2002.

With the original batch of DTT services starting in 1998

Sam Russell wrote: »

Can you imagine the screaming that will ensue on the 32nd of October

Peter Rhea

It's called humour, Mike.

Sam Russell

Originally Posted by Sam Russell
Can you imagine the screaming that will ensue on the 32nd of October

Quote:

Anyone who does not know about the analogue service going off air by the 31st of October probably does not know how many days are in October.


[It was a joke!]

eirman

Oireachtas tv is not just the Dail. There is the Sheanad and at least 4 committees. Loads of existing material (at no extra production cost) for that extra mux!

http://www.oireachtas.ie/ViewDoc.asp?fn=/documents/livewebcast/Web-Live.htm&CatID=83&m=o

Then you have future tribulals and maybe some court tv ..... some local government coverage etc.

lawhec

lawhec wrote: »

The intention - surely - is for the current four terrestrial channels to be made available in High Definition by around 2013/14. In that case, using DVB-T you might be able to get four video streams maximum on a single multiplex at around 6Mbps per video stream which even with recent codec encoding improvements is pushing it a bit. Reducing it to three would give a bit more elbow room to around 8Mbps. Then you'd have to include audio, EIT data, MHEG & WST teletext which also cut into the total bit rate available.

So say RTÉ One, TV3 and TG4 were able to launch HD services within the next 18 months and no new channels become available from what there currently is - you'd need two multiplexes to handle everything that's there, 4 HD and 3 SD services. As an example, one multiplex could hold RTÉ One HD, RTÉ Two HD, RTÉ News Now (SD), RTÉjr/RTÉ One +1 (SD), Aertel MHEG & WST Text & RTÉ Radio. The other multiplex, TV3 HD, TG4 HD, 3e (SD), WST text services for the two HD channels assuming they are still be broadcasting it possibly with MHEG services as well. Without any of the SD channels upgrading to HD, there is perhaps room for 2-3 more channels on the former multiplex and 3-4 on the latter.

Euronews? Possible, I think its terrestrial coverage in Europe is very limited on a 24hr basis (not broadcasting part-time as is the case on RTÉ right now).

Oireachtas TV? Again possible, and with coverage currently available on rte.ie, like News Now it shouldn't take too much effort to patch it into the DTT network.

Pan-Contentinal & Pan-Global News channels (Excluding Euronews)? Certainly possible. Russia Today is already broadcasting 24/7 on Freeview, and Al Jazeera is on during the evening hours. Those two may be interested in getting on to Saorview, France 24, DW-TV and CNN might also as well. Sky News and BBC World might be outside interests.

National Commercial Radio? This would include Today FM, Newstalk, 4FM and Spirit, the latter two would help increase its national coverage outside of urban areas in particular especially with the non movement of commercial DAB right now. Some of the regional and local stations might also take the opportunity to expand its terrestrial coverage e.g. Nova.

UK based channels? Excluding the five main terrestrials, who would be interested? I wouldn't rule E4 out as it's already popular in the south, is on Freeview and Freesat and if it didn't cost Channel 4 the earth for a slot on Saorview, they might go for it. Don't rule out a shopping or dial-a-tart channel from also being interested.

In terms of the additional costs of transmitting a second multiplex, it seems RTÉNL already have at least a second DTT transmitter at each site at present, fed into transmitting aerial etc. so the only additional cost would be the additional electricity required to power the transmitter on site along with equipment for receiving the second multiplex from the feeding network (if it hasn't already been installed yet) and the encoder at the source of the network being fed to the transmitters (assuming this hasn't already been tried).

If there is any potential benefit to getting a move on with more HD and/or additional services, the take up of Saorview in homes which currently rely on analogue terrestrial for RTÉ/TV3/TG4 could become quicker with the potential of shutting down analogue services earlier than planned. That itself is a saver on electricity costs.

Agreed.
RTE1+1 and some of the other "services" are in my view a complete waste of bandwith and money.
The only one worthwhile is the oireachtas channel.
What are we doing with radio on dtt for instance at all?
With RTE making such colossal losses at the moment they should be doing a cost benefit analysis on all these things but of course,they have carte blanche with the chequebook at our expense.

So I'd put RTE one and Two in hd on the mux and then TV3 and TG4 in sd [as neither has any desire for hd at the moment or the funds] and RTENN for now.
Nothing else.
Thats what would make sense.

Macy0161

Deleted User wrote: »

With RTE making such colossal losses at the moment they should be doing a cost benefit analysis on all these things but of course,they have carte blanche with the chequebook at our expense.

But the BAI stopped RTE having extra commercial channels at the behest of their competitors. Some "carte blanche"!

Their competitor namely tv3 is barely making money either so that was the right decision.
I don't know about other people but I don't want my licence fee chasing an ever increasing RTE debt to fund uneconomic channels when the public service obligations of the licence fee are enough and are well covered by the existing channels.

It's crazy.

Macy0161

Deleted User wrote: »

Their competitor namely tv3 is barely making money either so that was the right decision.

TV3 should look at itself as to why it isn't making money, rather than trying to hamper RTE and, in this case at least, saorview. TV3 never accepts responsibility for it's own performance imo. A successful launch of saorview will only help TV3, and a better mix of channels would've helped uptake. The BAI decision makes Irish DTT a weaker product.

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know about other people but I don't want my licence fee chasing an ever increasing RTE debt to fund uneconomic channels when the public service obligations of the licence fee are enough and are well covered by the existing channels.

I'm not sure I get your logic - surely they were hampered launching channels that had more chance of being successful and improving their economic situation? The BAI decision only aims to protect TV3 and payTV options. It certainly doesn't protect the licence fee payer, or enhance what the licence fee payer gets for their money - either in terms of content or long term financial committments.

marclt

Slightly off topic, but TV3 do need to look at their offer in order to get more advertising revenue in.

They have some great imported material - ratings winners like Corrie, X Factor they should be looking to the companies that sponsor these in the UK (* where applicable) to extend the sponsorship to Ireland for a start.

If RTE want to increase their offer then why not?

Macy0161

Macy0161 wrote: »

I'm not sure I get your logic - surely they were hampered launching channels that had more chance of being successful and improving their economic situation? The BAI decision only aims to protect TV3 and payTV options. It certainly doesn't protect the licence fee payer, or enhance what the licence fee payer gets for their money - either in terms of content or long term financial committments.

My logic is,more and more of the licence fee income is going to subsidise the servicing of RTE debt due to poor advertising revenue.
Selling advertising on new hardly watched channels would only make that worse imho.

@marclt-they do get irish sponsorship for those programmes at a rate I can only presume the market bears.
It's a miracle they make money at all being itv ireland for a lot of their schedule.
They have reduced salaries and done all the usual private sector cutbacks.

I've no problem with RTE increasing their offering,but only when they can afford it.
Currently,they are spending resources reducing programme quality,not increasing it imho.

lawhec

Deleted User wrote: »

What are we doing with radio on dtt for instance at all?

Radio services on Freeview in the UK have proven to be popular. The amount of stations on it is at its highest since launch. The only INR in the UK not on it is Classic (whom you would assume would require a high bitrate for MP2 to do it justice), U105 is on it in Northern Ireland to give NI wide coverage, the likes of Capital and Absolute wouldn't have joined if they didn't think it would be any benefit to them. Also for the BBC, it gives extra coverage to its digital-only services without requiring a DAB or internet radio receiver. The last bit I'm sure is the motivation for RTÉ to placing its otherwise DAB & Internet only stations on Saorview, so that licence fee payers in the state have extra access to these stations especially where DAB reception is non-existent.

Macy0161

Deleted User wrote: »

My logic is,more and more of the licence fee income is going to subsidise the servicing of RTE debt due to poor advertising revenue.
Selling advertising on new hardly watched channels would only make that worse imho.

What they have been forced into aren't that attractive - what they proposed could've been. It's just typical protectionism from our regulators that ultimately sees the consumer lose out.

lawhec

lawhec wrote: »

Radio services on Freeview in the UK have proven to be popular. The amount of stations on it is at its highest since launch. The only INR in the UK not on it is Classic (whom you would assume would require a high bitrate for MP2 to do it justice), U105 is on it in Northern Ireland to give NI wide coverage, the likes of Capital and Absolute wouldn't have joined if they didn't think it would be any benefit to them. Also for the BBC, it gives extra coverage to its digital-only services without requiring a DAB or internet radio receiver. The last bit I'm sure is the motivation for RTÉ to placing its otherwise DAB & Internet only stations on Saorview, so that licence fee payers in the state have extra access to these stations especially where DAB reception is non-existent.

Oh I agree and use them a lot but my point is RTE can't afford to be running a 2nd mux at this time if it's the bandwith for the radio and the low viewership bloat that is rte1+1 etc thats pushing them over.

Macy0161

Is it RTE pushing the second mux or is it the BAI? I could be wrong, but my impression was that it was the BAI, in terms of having the capacity for other services?

I'd say theres two of them in it.
The BAI after all is a quango as is comreg,none of which seems to have a grasp of commercial reality,though what little grasp they have would be in reverse order in terms of who has the most of that little grasp.

bk

Black Briar, the second mux would have to be fired up in the next year anyway when RTE are required to launch RTE 1 HD and I'm sure TV3 will be gagging to launch TV3 HD soon too.

So either way the second mux is going to be required and it hardly costs much extra to run anyway, just electricity cost, as all the gear is in place anyway.

It would be more of a waste not to use it.

As for RTE spending more money on extra channels, that is the point they don't have to spend much for these extra channels.

In particular the idea behind RTE Plus was to take premium US content that they have already licensed, which is currently shown late at night and instead show it at peak time.

Running such a channel wouldn't have cost RTE almost anything extra. Just basic scheduling and play out gear, probably wouldn't even need to hire a single extra person.

Also it would be unlikely to take from the other RTE channels, instead it is more likely to take from other, US focused channels, like Sky 1, E4, etc.

So would very likely lead to increased advertising and profits for RTE.

Of course this is why TV3 didn't want it, competition for 3e. But IMO that is very short sighted by TV3.

The Cush

Macy0161 wrote: »

Is it RTE pushing the second mux or is it the BAI? I could be wrong, but my impression was that it was the BAI, in terms of having the capacity for other services?

RTÉ, BAI, Dept of Comms etc. they are all part of the Departmental DSO Steering Group. The decision wasn't made in isolation. Lots of discussion going on behind the publicly available consultations and reports no doubt.

lawhec

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh I agree and use them a lot but my point is RTE can't afford to be running a 2nd mux at this time if it's the bandwith for the radio and the low viewership bloat that is rte1+1 etc thats pushing them over.

+1 channels in general are quite cheap to run. Many such cases don't need general human involvement on a day to day basis except to schedule different advertisements at such breaks and if necessary putting up captions where such programming cannot be shown. If the main channel itself is done from a playout server with no live material, then the time shift channel can be arranged in a similar manner. Otherwise the time shift channel just simply caches the main channel's material to play out an hour later with relevant silent cue marks to tell the time shift when to play different adverts. If RTÉ One +1 helps bring in additional advertising revenue to cover at the very least the running costs of that channel, then it will be a plus as far as RTÉ are concerned.

As I've already said about a second mux we pretty much know that the transmitting equipment is sitting the ready, so the capital costs are not near that required to get the first multiplex up and running. The only question is if the costs can be covered altogether from additional multiplexing, network linking and electricity required for a second multiplex. Getting some additional broadcasters like France 24 or Russia Today on to a second multiplex if they are willing to pay to do so would help defray costs.

marclt

@Lawhec, I don't even think the timeshift UK channels use different adverts. It would be handy if ITV blocked the time during daybreak on ITV1 +1 - it can be quite confusing first thing in the morning.

Timeshift channels are cheap to run, useful but possibly not really that necessary in so far as PVRs are becoming more commonplace.

But perhaps we should have more content as a driver, to encourage DTT take up and to make Saorview attractive against all of the other digital platforms out there. It is what made Freeview so popular after all.

BAI bodged the pay for DTT process big style and probably wasted a fair few euro in the process. They really should be held accountable for that. WHO advises these people?

Antenna

The Second MUX transmitting since recently is just blank with zero content.
Everything is on MUX 1

Having the 2nd MUX transmitting blank is pointless and is causing an unnecessary deterioration on one of the RTE analogue channels in certain areas.

It should be switched off until there is actual content to go on it (and not duplicating a service on MUX1).

lawhec

marclt wrote: »

@Lawhec, I don't even think the timeshift UK channels use different adverts. It would be handy if ITV blocked the time during daybreak on ITV1 +1 - it can be quite confusing first thing in the morning.

Timeshift channels are cheap to run, useful but possibly not really that necessary in so far as PVRs are becoming more commonplace.

But perhaps we should have more content as a driver, to encourage DTT take up and to make Saorview attractive against all of the other digital platforms out there. It is what made Freeview so popular after all.

BAI bodged the pay for DTT process big style and probably wasted a fair few euro in the process. They really should be held accountable for that. WHO advises these people?

I'm not sure what channels which time shift show the same adverts an hour later (obviously part of a deal with advertisers if it were the case) as I'd assume many of us would be hardcore enough to notice! The technical necessary on a platform like Freeview which has ample PVRs available to have time shift channels is one worthy of debate - you would have to ignore the possibility of recording clashes which a +1 channel can help solve. It's inadvertently happened in my house quite a few times when someone is watching a programme and they get a message flashing up that it wants to record two programmes at one and your have to either cancel one of these recordings or be forced to change the channel to one of them! :pac: In any case, broadcasters seem to be happy enough with them and the recent launch of ITV1 +1 shows little sign of this stopping. What odds of 5 +1 in the near future?

Antenna

Antenna wrote: »

The Second MUX transmitting since recently is just blank with zero content.
Everything is on MUX 1

Having the 2nd MUX transmitting blank is pointless and is causing an unnecessary deterioration on one of the RTE analogue channels in certain areas.

It should be switched off until there is actual content to go on it (and not duplicating a service on MUX1).

Here here!

My point was further than that and that a 2nd mux shouldn't be considered at all in the current climate.
I wouldn't sell the 2nd tx panels,they will be needed sometime,just not now.
It's not really RTE's fault that they were bought...all that was decided during the celtic tiger era when people had money going out their ears.

It will be 3 or 4 years in my opinion untill switching them on makes economic sense.

Yes the electricity to run 50 of them is an awfull lot of money for no benefit.
RTE1+1,junior and niche radio stations,gimme a break...costing tens of thousands in electricity every month when the bill comes through the door and beggar all watching or listening to them.

It's the type of economic madness Imelda Marcos would be proud of.

Gerry Wicklow

ITV wouldn't go to the time and trouble of running +1 services unless they saw a benefit in additional ad revenue. I must confess that I find them useful sometimes even with elaborate recording equipment.

I agree with BB that a 2nd mux is a luxury we can ill afford right now. As for the niche radio channels, I have yet to find anyone (other than here) who has even heard of them, never mind actually listening. I'd love to know their listenership figures.

Sam Russell

Gerry Wicklow wrote: »

ITV wouldn't go to the time and trouble of running +1 services unless they saw a benefit in additional ad revenue. I must confess that I find them useful sometimes even with elaborate recording equipment.

I agree with BB that a 2nd mux is a luxury we can ill afford right now. As for the niche radio channels, I have yet to find anyone (other than here) who has even heard of them, never mind actually listening. I'd love to know their listenership figures.

A 2nd mux is just not needed. The radio channels are a waste of space outside the main four. Why simulcast RTE Radio 1 with the longwave version. They broadcast RTEjr radio, but do not publicise it. Mind you, they hardly publicise Saorview.

The only purpose of a second mux is to justify the BAI. How many people do you need to supervise/organise one mux broadcast on 51 transmitters?

At least with two muxes, you can send someone out to count them!